So the NYT had a weird sort of Tweet-in with Trump and there was a whole bunch of stuff in it, but the two biggest takeaways from it were (I thought):

1) Trump discovered that a lot of anti-corruption laws just... doesn't apply to the Presidency due to specific exception! There's actually no legal requirement for him to place his companies in a blind trust or divest himself or anything apparently! Now he's saying that he's still going to let his kids run them, but whew, what'd that take, two weeks? Dude should just get "FOR SALE" printed on all his ties.

2) When Trump met Obama after the election, that was the first time they'd ever actually met.

Mike Masnick wrote:So, in effect, Halderman isn't saying that he's got evidence of e-voting fraud, but is simply arguing that if no one checks, no one will ever know. So we should check in order to be sure that there wasn't hacking. That's... pretty sensible.

Carl Bialik and Rob Arthur at FiveThirtyEight add, Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results. There's a statistic some people are quoting that Clinton did 7% worse in Wisconsin counties that used e-voting machines than ones that used optical scanners and paper ballots, but...there's not really any reason to believe that e-voting machines are the variable that led to that gap; the differences in those counties are easy to explain based on demographics alone.

None of which is to say that our election machines are secure and couldn't be hacked. They're pieces of shit and they should all be scrapped. Good old pen and paper is the only way we should be voting, and that's been clear for at least a dozen years.

I'm with Haldeman: I don't see any reason to believe voting machines were compromised, but it would be a very good idea to double-check, just in case.

Stein's been raising money for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania; according to Ars she's up to $3M as of earlier today, which is more than enough to call for a recount in Wisconsin by tomorrow's deadline. She's still raising money to finance recounts in the other two states.

Tom Price as prospective Secretary of Health & Human Services? I can see the hand of Mike Pence in that appointment, and I'm continuing to be amazed/terrified at their ability to pick the person that can most effectively destroy their department for every successive Cabinet pick.

I really feel like I should be more familiar with Tom Price... oh wait, Rachel Maddow says he's the guy who wrote those dozens of bills to repeal Obamacare? Because if at first you don't succeed, Try^67 Again.

Mothra wrote:Goooood goddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

Seconding that.

Y'know, ever since the election, I've noticed the same pair of thoughts popping into my head:1) I don't know how I'm going to survive four years of this.2) Can we just talk about Death Stranding instead?

: Mention something from KPCC or Rachel Maddow: Go on about Homeworld for X posts

On the other hand, hey, it's a fast-track to political asylum in another country!

I recently got into an argument with a friend's Facebook friend who argued Liberals being angry about flag-burning criminalization was just another example of how the left has the most double-standards because he's pretty sure Dukes of Hazzard reruns stopped being shown because liberals wrote in to protest the Confederate flag on the General Lee.

Like, that's some pretty fucking A+ level Internet trolling but this was from a real human being with his real name attached, in a thread involving people he personally knew!

Rico wrote:I recently got into an argument with a friend's Facebook friend who argued Liberals being angry about flag-burning criminalization was just another example of how the left has the most double-standards because he's pretty sure Dukes of Hazzard reruns stopped being shown because liberals wrote in to protest the Confederate flag on the General Lee.

Does, like, nobody remember that is a thing that happened? Because that is a thing that happened.

I mean, obviously voting for a candidate doesn't mean you 100% endorse all their past policy positions. But as far as trolling someone on Facebook goes, I feel like that's a way better comeback than The Dukes of Hazzard.

Now, people are using their own Christian names. Like, right there, for everyone to see. I'd ask what their mother would think if they heard them talking like that, except she's already down-thread saying Clinton watched Chris Stevens die on a live feed while scissoring with Huma Abedin.

: Mention something from KPCC or Rachel Maddow: Go on about Homeworld for X posts

zaratustra wrote:they're even getting elected President after saying these things

And I hate to repeat myself, but that's what gets me most about this election. Even if by some miracle he doesn't crack the world in half because there's a bit of money to be made there, the damage is already done; we've collectively agreed that we're approving of a self-absorbed asshole running things. Like, everything we've been taught about being nice to each other was... what? Just a lie to keep children from actively shanking each other?

: Mention something from KPCC or Rachel Maddow: Go on about Homeworld for X posts